Mass. House votes to bar use of welfare money for alcohol, tobacco, or lottery tickets

[The Straight Story]

Curb on use of welfare cash OK’d


House lawmakers voted unanimously today to ban welfare recipients from spending their cash benefits on alcohol, tobacco and Lottery tickets, reigniting an issue that flared during Governor Deval Patrick’s reelection campaign last year.

The House approved the ban, as part of a larger amendment to the state budget, on a 155-0 vote.

The measure not only targets welfare recipients, it also bans storeowners from accepting welfare debit cards for purchases of alcohol, tobacco and Lottery tickets. Store owners who violate the ban could be fined $500 for the first offense, and more than $1,000 for subsequent offenses.

“It will prevent further scamming of the system and abuse of taxpayer dollars,” Representative Shaunna O’Connell, a newly elected Taunton Republican, told her House colleagues in her maiden floor speech.

No one spoke in opposition to the ban.

http://articles.boston.com/2011-04-26/news/29475518_1_welfare-debit-cards-lottery-tickets-welfare-recipients

[kestrel91316]

1. Completely appropriate. I'm puzzled what took them so long to

prohibit it.

[Joe the Revelator]

4. Agreed

[pipi_k]

11. Agreed...same as if a friend or a family member

says he needs money for food or rent or a bill, and I give it to him and then find out it was spent on booze or some other non-essential.

People want money for shit like that...fine. Say so.

Don't get money under false pretenses and then use it some other way.

[reggie the dog]

35. getting welfare means you need money for everything

including alcohol, tobacco, lottery tickets (the only way poor people will ever become rich), weed or other drugs. The system has failed us, there are not enough jobs for all of us. People getting welfare cannot go to work because there are no jobs. So long as there is not zero percent unemployment i am all for giving people welfare money so that they can spend it as they see fit. Some people like to relax by overeating and will still be able to do so on welfare, others like to drink a sixer, others like to smoke a few ciggies every day, and other people may look forward to spending 10 dollars on weed each week (2 fat joints). If you are so poor you are on welfare you probably have lots of stress so why is it bad if people drink, smoke, play the lotto or smoke some weed if it reduces their stress?

[pipi_k]

56. Being on welfare because one is too poor

to afford necessities and then spending money on tobacco, booze, smokes, or lottery tickets is counterproductive, IMO.

And it doesn't make sense.


Spending money on those things means there's that much less money for the necessities. Meaning the person is still going to have stress that he'll deal with by buying booze, etc.

Meaning less money for necessities. And stress. And dealing with stress in inappropriate ways.

An endless circle of insanity.


there are other ways to deal with stress that are probably more healthy in the long run. Oh, and free. The person deals with stress by using relaxation techniques (for example), has more money for necessities, and may find a significant reduction in stress.

And if s/he has young children, positive ways of dealing with stress are good for them as well. Family dynamics and all.

If the kids had a voice in the matter, I'm sure they would prefer their mom or dad to be there for them, in body and mind. Not in an alcoholic haze. Or getting stressed out even more after spending grocery money on lottery tickets and getting nothing.

Really...is there something wrong with considering the feelings of the rest of the family?

[reggie the dog]

60. shouldnt welfare pay for the necessities plus a little extra to be spent

on ENJOYING life? like going to the movies once in a while, or to the bar, or even getting a dime bag, some beer and a couple of cigars once a month and watching some kind of sports on tv with your friends?

[pipi_k]

76. And how would they figure that?

Would everyone get the same amount? Say, $20.00?

What if some people felt they just couldn't get by on "only" $20.00 a month extra for "fun"?

What if they thought they deserved more?

And whatever happened to free fun, anyway? There is such a thing, you know.

When I was a kid, some of our free fun came from taking the stale bread crusts my mom saved up and going to the local park, where we would feed the ducks in one of the large ponds there.

Family picnics...each family brought something and we shared food and fun. Kind of like a family potluck.

Every once in a while a group of our friends get together for "movie night". They rent a DVD. People bring popcorn or candy. It all gets put out on tables. We gather in the living room, fill our faces, and have a blast.

There are so many ways to relax and have fun. Why should it have to cost something?

Again...if the welfare recipient has a family, why should it be only about HIM or HER?

Sorry, kids...there's no money for shoes because Daddy has to have his case of beer/cigarettes/pot/whatever to relax.

Yeah. OK...

[reggie the dog]

82. what if your teenaged or adult kids live with you

and you share your weed and beer with them?

[Baby Bear]

79. It is the puritan strain

The puritan is afraid that someone somewhere is having a good time.

[Hannah Bell]

2. this is rhe same thing they're doing in australia. the ptb have a global plan.

[RandomThoughts]

3. That presumes welfare is a check that is given.

Not a correction to a broken system of distribution.

It also maintains a claim of control over how wrongly consolidated dollars, then taxed, and then distributed, is spent.

It is a continuation of consolidations, where they set choices over other people based on ill gotten gains.

By that ruling, the wealthy can be limited in there actions, since their wealth is far worse, welfare without need.

It is no different then Corporate towns.

If there was ample employment opportunities, that did not contribute to wrong consolidations, and at a fair living wage, then they could make some argument about personal responsibility, but in current situations, that is wrong.

:shrug:

And I am still due beer and travel money, and many experiences.

[madrchsod]

5. big deal...they`ll trade cash for a percentage on the card

around here it`s 50-60% on the dollar.

[JohnnyRingo]

6. Since when was a welfare debit card good for alcohol, tobacco, or lotto tix?

Is that how they've been doing it in MA all along, or is this another of those unnecessary laws that are just meant to demean the poor? I'm pretty liberal, but there seems to be an inherent problem with using a state debit card to buy those items, and I'm surprised no one changed it years ago. There's more here than meets the eye.

On edit, I see the ban will only affect a small percentage of debit card holders who use them "for other programs" where the card can be converted to cash for paying bills. The article doesn't go into what those programs are, but I'm guessing it's maybe disability or perhaps veterans benefits. The people who have a "welfare card" were already electronically barred from using their card to buy those items.

It appears the legislators want to somehow stop certain people from converting the cards to cash and making what the state has determined to be sinful purchases with those dollars. Maybe a big red "W" tattooed on their foreheads would help shopowners identify them.

[aquart]

20. Telling anyone receiving vet benefits how to spend them should be banned.

If you are right, that is OUTRAGEOUS.

[jwirr]

28. They may be referring to the new GoDirect debit cards you can

get when on a federal cash assistance program such as Social Security, SSI, Veteran's benefits and other programs. I just started using that system because I do not want to open another checking account at a bank.

[Bluenorthwest]

61. Social Security is not a 'cash assistance program'.

Nor are Veteran's benefits. These are earned benefits, not assistance. The terminologies are important.

[jwirr]

81. I did not say it was. All people that receive cash from the government

from any program can do it through this new debit card method. There is it clear enough for you?

[WingDinger]

7. A mostly dumbass redundant action meant to paint welfarers as wastrels without hard limits.

[bobbolink]

15. Exactly. But "progressives" once again go along with the RW.

Then they will wonder why poor people cease voting for those who throw them under the bus.

[reggie the dog]

37. Here in France we got it right

I am unemployed as of today, my unemployment comes as a direct deposit into my bank. For people who run out of unemployment the RSA (welfare) comes as a direct deposit into their bank account, housing allocations come as a direct deposit into your bank, back to school allocations for the kids do as well as do the allocations you get for the first 3 years of your kids life. If you are poor you qualify for aid, you get aid, and you spend your money as you see fit. If people want to spend their money on some wine, some tobacco, and some hash then so be it because we simply help those in need and treat them as adults capable of deciding how to spend their money. If one person likes to go to a film and out for dinner with their girlfriend they may spend 40 euros or 50 euros, if another person has no girlfriend and spends that money on hash, tobacco and alcohol who am I or anyone else in society to tell them that spending money on dinner in a restaurant and going to see a film is better than spending it on smoking and drinking?

[provis99]

80. the problem is the French are just more civilized than us.

I wish we could adopt more of the French attitude here in this country.

[blondeatlast]

27. Exactly. nt

[Enrique]

70. yes, and with no intention of having any practical effect

and with adding costs, to the stores and to the state. What a waste.

[franzia99]

89. Oh come on. Can't you see a welfare dad possibly spending the money on stuff instead of food for

his kids? I'm sure plenty of welfare recipients don't do that, but nothing wrong with creating a law to address the bad apples who do.

[safeinOhio]

8. Can we pass a law

that bans the use of money from corporation tax breaks from being invested over seas or going to CEOs?

just asking

[Demit]

9. Doesn't bother me at all. These are appropriate limitations.

I could do without Ms O'Connell's way of framing it however.

[HockeyMom]

10. NY wants to bar soda, and other sugary drinks

Why stop there? You could probably bar chips, cake/cookies, ice cream, and a whole lot of grocery items that might be "unhealthy" too.

[Hassin Bin Sober]

12. The cardholders should only be allowed to buy gruel and hand-me-down clothes.

[LooseWilly]

24. And used water bottles ... and hand-looms to make their own clothes...

To buy anything else is just irresponsible. And a sin.

[coalition_unwilling]

58. There's a Repuke scumbag in Michigan named Caswell who has

proposed that foster children only be able to buy second-hand clothes with their clothing allowances. No word yet on whether Caswell proposes to limit said foster children to eating only gruel, although I'm certain it's coming. Only a matter of time.

[elleng]

16. Should do, and as I recall, when I used food stamps some years ago,

such were not included among permissible items.

[HockeyMom]

29. Toilet paper, diapers, and "sanitary products"

I think they couldn't buy those either. My sister-in-law used cloth diapers and had to wash them. Wash cloths for the toilet, I suppose. Old rags and wash them for your "time of the month"? When women didn't, and COULDN'T, go outside the home.

Gross, gross, gross, for all these things.

[elleng]

51. Don't remember that, but it was/is called 'food stamps.'

[Taitertots]

13. Welfare should not subsidize drugs for addicts

Even when those drugs are distributed by corporations.

[reggie the dog]

42. Why not?

Welfare exists because capitalism does not create enough jobs. Those failed by the system somehow dont deserve to use the same drugs to relax as those who are abused by the system as exploited wage earners? If a poor person can budget enough to have a roof, food, and still have a few bucks left over to buy beer, tobacco, weed, heroin or the like then what is the big deal? People get welfare because we esteem that everyone deserves a certain level of income even if capitalism cannot provide a job to get someone that income. What people do with that income is their own affair.

[Taitertots]

52. Why should it?

Why should we pay so that the poor can be victimized by corporate drug dealers? Exploited into getting addicted to dangerous drugs under the guise that it helps them deal with being exploited for their labor.

People get welfare because we esteem that everyone deserves to have certain basic needs met. Getting drugs is not a basic need and therefore should not be covered.

[reggie the dog]

55. I guess we have a different opinion of welfare

to me welfare is given to people as a replacement salary when they are failed by capitalism and there is no job for them. I would prefer that the government acted to ensure that unemployment didnt exist but the capitalist dont want that because wages and benefits would go up in a workers market. Seeing as not enough jobs are created and we give people money to live (what a job should provide for them but doenst due to lack of jobs for everyone). Welfare is simply the money we give, in place of a salary, so people can live. How they spend their money is none of our business. I work most of the year and am lucky enough to only collect unemployment from time to time (no welfare) so i pay taxes into the system for those failed by capitalism worse than i am and i dont see why their welfare would only be used to meed certain basic needs. These are people, treat them with dignity. Let them dispense of their money as workers are let do with their wages.

[pipi_k]

57. OK I would go along with this line of thinking under one condition...

that if, as you say, welfare is a replacement salary for people when the system has failed them, people getting welfare should have to work for the community in return for their "salaries".

If they work for it, then fine. They earned it, just like people who work regular jobs. Who cares how they spend it...

[reggie the dog]

59. Like i said, i would prefer a system in which the government provided

jobs, perhaps a system in which you had say 6 months unemployment benefits in which you are free to look for work "in your field" after which time you get to do a community service job. You could have all sorts of jobs, putting on plays and concerts for adults and kids, giving free acting, music, dance etc lessons to kids and adults, cleaning up litter/grafiti, planting and trimming trees along the roads and in parks any public program you imagine today imagine with an infux of millions of previously unemployed people. I also think that day care up to age 3 and pre school from 3 to 5 should be free like school so that would eliminate the need for people to pay for private day care if they found work. Some of the unemployed people could be trained to be nannies for example. Granted if people were working they would want a salary, a liveable salary so the cost of this welfare system would be higher than our current system but the benefits would be dramatic. People's self esteem and standard of living, after being "on the bottom" for so long would skyrocket with their pride in a job well done and in seeing a much calmer, happier, more harmonious society.

But this is not possilbe in capitalism as we know it because that would mean that anyone who would want to would be given a job (ccc kind of progams) so that unemployment would be zero, workers everywhere would let their bosses and the owners of the companies know who had the power. WE, the people would have the power, not they, the few, the owners and their lackies.

so until someone fixes this shit system in which there are not enough jobs for all of us then i say let people spend their replacement salaries, known as welfare, which are already too small, as they see fit!

[Taitertots]

62. I disagree with your opinions about welfare

Welfare exists to ensure that everyone in society has the ability to meet their basic human needs. Your opinions about welfare are not based on any legal or historical context.

Welfare doesn't have to be the same as giving someone cash. How they spend their money is none of your business (within the bounds of the law), how they spend electronic funds provided to them to meet their basic needs is certainly our business. You can't conflate directed aid with personal funds.

[reggie the dog]

83. I base my opinion on welfare from the current French system of welfare

[demwing]

73. I agree to the extent that the product being sold is legal

If we can legally sell alcohol and tobacco, then cash aid recipients should be able to purchase those legal products.

It its ridiculous to say that cash aid recipients should be allowed to purchase any illegal drug. However, whether those drugs should remain illegal is another debate...

[reggie the dog]

84. the cash aid people should be allowed to buy illegal drugs

because in my take on the debate drugs should be legalized.

[franzia99]

88. Do we really want to pay for people to buy drugs? Come on.

[elleng]

14. Surprised this hasn't been done before.

[Bozita]

17. Why not ban 'em from using the debit cards for ABORTIONS? (Two birds w/one stone)

I can't believe they're missing out on this one.

[slackmaster]

18. Article sez "Credit on those cards can be converted directly into cash"

Which means any such ban would be impossible to enforce.

This is about politics, nothing more. It has nothing to do with protecting welfare recipients from themselves any more than it does with making sure benefits are spent on real needs.

[Exultant Democracy]

25. Yep, passing a bill, just to pass a bill. Sound and fury signifying nothing.

[demwing]

69. Is there a fee for that conversion?

If so, who gets the fee?

Who profits from his ban? Follow the money...

[Bill McBlueState]

19. ooh, that's really stickin it to 'em

When I was on food stamps in Massachusetts, I'd use my EBT card at the grocery store and stop at the liquor store on the way home. I didn't use the EBT card at the liquor store.

Poor people need to relax, too.

[reggie the dog]

43. +1

[NYC Liberal]

21. Good, I agree with this. nt

[Davis_X_Machina]

22. The major cause of poverty in America...

...is not having enough money. To end it, you give people money.

The moment you go beyond that point, you have another, different, agenda.

Not a bad one, necessarily; not a good one necessarily, either.

But an agenda that ought by rights to be grounds for a separate debate.

And that's the largely-missing debate.

[slackmaster]

48. We wouldn't want to create an economic climate that encourages job creation or anything

Just give them money.

[Davis_X_Machina]

65. If you...

...define 'poverty' as poverty, yes.

If you define it as the inevitable result of moral decay, or the predictable outcome of capitalist accumulation, or the side effect of substance abuse, or whatever, then you're not actually talking about poverty any more.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

23. Punishing the poor for being poor has long been a favorite pastime for rich politicians.

[etherealtruth]

34. ... and more than a few good folk on DU

[bobbolink]

40. Exactly. Thank you.

[nichomachus]

26. What they need to be focused on

Is the fact that 30 Mass corporations paid zero in federal income taxes last year. That's the real problem.

[reggie the dog]

30. Here in France your benefits go into your bank account

and you spend them as you see fit. I get unemployment as a payment, you get RSA (welfare) if you run out of unemployment and it is a direct deposit into your bank. Housing allocations, direct into your bank account, allocation for buying kids school supplies is also just direct into your account. If people want to buy tobacco, wine, or hash with their welfare that is their business. Here in France we kind of think that if people are poor and have few pleasures in life then they may as well have a drink or a smoke if it helps them relax.

[etherealtruth]

32. Believe me please, there are many of us here in the US

That feel exactly the same way

[Bluenorthwest]

64. Most such payments here are by direct deposit

the programs called 'welfare' are State run, so there is no national policy and the policy being discussed is that of one State, not the US as a whole, just fyi. Also, while hash might be 'their business' it is not legal in France, which in fact has the most regressive laws in Europe around cannabis.

[reggie the dog]

85. you don't understand how french law works

in the USA or the UK you give penalties and you enforce the laws, except speeding on the expressway in many states, well in france basically all laws are enforced like speeding on the expressway is enforced in chicago. The official law in France says you get 10 years for having weed and 20 years for growing it. In practice the judges refused to give the penalties and the executive changed the sentencing guidelines to be a maximum of a year for personal use, which was then again lowered to "giving jail only as a last resource". In practice people have been caught growing 80 or 100 plants and who had kilos harvested and they got no jail, or 6 months. In most areas of france the local directives say to either do NOTHING for cannabis under a certain amount like 5, 10, 20, or 50 grams. In other areas they will confiscate for this much hash and that will be it. You have to be really unlucky to get busted and go to trial. At trial you risk a fine of a 100 euros or so, maximum and if you are part of the 95% of people who have been arrested you get off with nothing when you go to see a psychologist and they say that you are a "normal" person who smokes some hash. People take out bars of hash, roll joints in the open in public, and smoke on the street more in France than they do in the Netherlands. You can just walk around smoking a joint in the street here and the average person doesn't give a shit, even most cops will not bother to come up and ask what you are smoking unless you look to be too young (14 or under).

French law is like that, they make a really threatening law and then the judges refuse to give disproportionate penalties and the laws teeth are pulled right out of it.

[Morning Dew]

31. Lawmakers should be paid with these cards and participate in the prohibitions.

Since they're living off public money.

[Baby Bear]

78. Good Idea!

Let them taste their own medicine.

[reggie the dog]

33. Does it bother anyone on here that i spend 60 euros a month on hash

whether the money comes from my job or from my unemployment benefits when i am out of work? Why can some people use food as a "drug" or a fix all and get fat and out of shape on their welfare money but another person cant drink a 6 pack, or buy a pack of cigarettes or even buy some weed to relax??? Benefits should just come as a direct deposit into a bank account which can be taken out as cash and spent by the people as if it were money coming from a job they did. After all we have welfare because the capitalist system is flawed and does not create enough jobs for everyone to be employed.

[Modern_Matthew]

39. Doesn't bother me. In fact, I encourage it. nt

[Bluenorthwest]

66. If hash bothers no one in France, France should legalize it.

France has some harsh and vague laws around cannabis. Selective enforcement, many aspects of law that remind me of more conservative American states.
Leaving the impression that hash is legal in France is not responsible nor accurate. Peace!

[reggie the dog]

86. I never said it was legal, but you can smoke in the street with little

or no worry. People smoke in the street in small towns, big cities as if it were legal. The main left party, the socialists, are divided between decriminalization and legalization, the greens (big party here) support legalization and the right wing supports the current de facto decriminalization and has said over and over that people should not go to jail for having and using hash (interpreted by judges as covering personal growers as well).

In the north of France the police will often not even confiscate small bits of hash because in Belgium you can have 3 grams on you legally. Up north you can have an ounce, no worries. In Paris, Lyon, Marseille less than 20 grams and you fase confiscation at worst. Out in some small towns it is different but even where i live, a town of 5 thousand, people take out bars of hash, roll and smoke on the street as if it were legal. The average person doesnt give a damn and doesnt say anything or call the cops and the cops dont want to be bothered with the paperwork. I have come into contact with national and local police at dinner parties here and i have never found one who thinks that it is worth it to bust people for hash as the judges just refuse to take small cases or just dismiss them.

When the right wing has proposed on the spot fines and the left prones legalization and when you risk no jail for personal use i think we are doing as well as lots of states in the usa, similar to oregon.

It took me a while to figure out that in france maximum penalties are rarely if ever given and that the judges "think outside the box" and refuse to give long sentences for trivial acts. A dealer recently got 2 years for his 3rd dealing offence but he had sold over a kilo of coke to the cops!

[Armstead]

36. I have always been proud to live in Mass.....These days, not so much

We've always had a certain amount of boneheaded reactionary crap, but it has been far outweighed by our liberal overall environment.

These days, it seems like the boneheaded reactionary segment is growing.

[Modern_Matthew]

38. The less fortunate should have a right to their vices the same as anyone else. nt

[RebelOne]

41. Wish that would happen here in Georgia.

Our local TV station WSB just did a big expose' on welfare debit cards being used for anything other than food or necessities for the families. In fact, one store owner just stocked his store with food stamps.

[reggie the dog]

45. why do you care what poor people buy with their aid?

really why do you think you should be able to tell them? why are they on welfare? because capitalism does not provide jobs for everyone all the time, capitalism likes 10 percent unemployment to drive down wages. in that context the poor are just victims of a broken system. social welfare is a band aid for the broken system and you think you should be able to tell those victims how to use their band aid???

[GoneOffShore]

44. The myth of the "Deserving Poor" -

Only those who are humble, pious and willing to work at any job, no matter how menial or filthy or dangerous, deserve "welfare".

Anyone else deserves to starve and have no simple pleasures.

[reggie the dog]

46. i hope that is sarcasm

plus what would you do with all the people willing to work any job yet unable to find work because there is only one job opening for every 6 to 7 unemployed people? what would you do after all the want ads were filled and there was still 6 or 8 pecent unemployment due to lack of jobs?

[GoneOffShore]

49. total sarc

Should have made it rougher so that the Poe was obvious.

[reggie the dog]

53. its our culture that is too rough

it should be obvious that you were sarcastic.

[handmade34]

47. "...abuse of taxpayer dollars..."??

the economic system depends on consumerism... even the consumption of "alcohol, tobacco and lottery tickets"

create work and we wouldn't need to restrict use of money

"...This conceptualization of welfare, particularly food welfare, as a method of consumer stimulus rather than social service is not new. It is rooted in New Deal efforts to transform relief programs into consumer programs, efforts illustrated well by the first food stamp program, which ran from 1939 to 1943..."

...the money is going to "the other" so the lawmakers justify the restriction... if it was going to their friends or family i would imagine sentiment would be different

[TheCowsCameHome]

50. And...............?

[darkstar3]

54. When you loan someone money, you have no right to tell them how to spend it.

It really is just that simple.

[NavyDem]

63. I could agree with you in premise

if welfare was a loan. It is a program to assist with essentials that to my knowledge requires no payback (hence not loaned, but given). Booze, smokes, and lottery tickets (as examples) are not necessities.

[darkstar3]

67. In a way, it is a loan.

It's money given to help get people back on their feet, and when they are, they'll have jobs from which they can pay income taxes, which help fund...welfare.

Of course, even if that wasn't the case, welfare would be more like a gift, and I would still believe that the giver would have no say over how the money is spent.

[NavyDem]

77. Ok...

I can understand that point of view. Although most states that I'm aware of have limits on what you can use welfare to purchase. Here in California, you can even use EBT at some fast food places. That is convenient for those who get benefits but do not have the means to prepare their own food.

I could see welfare being used for food, non-alcoholic drinks, shelter, clothing, and transportation. This would allow a person more ability to to get back on their feet IMO. I could even see it used for medical MJ (since legalization has not yet occurred).

[handmade34]

71. who dictates necessities??

everything starts getting very sticky

I don't think people should use food stamps to buy meat or any processed food because they are not necessities??? I don't eat them so why should my tax dollars go to someone else buying them??? (just example - while I don't consider meat and processed food necessities, I wouldn't pretend to dictate to someone else...)

gets very sticky indeed...

[NavyDem]

72. Necessities:

Food, water, shelter, clothing and possibly even transportation. How each of those are defined individually, I wouldn't consider myself qualified to do.

[demwing]

75. Tell that to my Student Loan guarantors /nt

[KamaAina]

68. They'll just go to New Hampshire like everyone else

:eyes:

[provis99]

74. yet farmers can use their government welfare for Mustangs and Corvettes.

just another example of how we shit on poor people in this society.

[franzia99]

87. Sounds fine to me.